Don’t expect big changes in Fed pot policy

At least not unless President Obama gets a leash onto the US Attorney for the Northern California District. In a very cryptic statement, it doesn’t look like she intends to slow down in the least.

Part of the problem is the omissions on the part of California’s state government to set up a regulatory scheme. Still, there is no excuse for cracking down in Mendocino where the county had enacted a scheme that could actually have brought some control to the situation. The “enforcement” seems borderline obsessive, and will actually generate the opposite of the intended results.

14 comments

Depends what the “intended result” is. If the intended result is to ensure the cannabis industry continues to involve violence and environmental damage that you can then point to as justification for even more money for law enforcement ot combat those problems, then the Feds’ policies make perfect sense.

It’s time to take back our Constitutional State’s Right to enact State pot regulations with NO U.S. involvement. Where does it say in the Constitution that marijuana must be prohibited to all U.S. citizens? What authority gives the U.S. government the right to set up laws concerning a drug proven to be a universal panacea for most all cancer patients as well as many who suffer back problems which is the vast majority of elder citizens. There’s now a crack-down going on in the HUD rent subsidized housing complexes in Humboldt County. Two of my friends besides myself were served notice to cease and desist our medical marijuana usage or face eviction. So the Attorney General has it’s local effect now on Humboldt senior citizens. Are we just going to lie down and take this abuse of State power to harm California citizens? Why are our local government officials standing up for State’s Right to enact State ordinances re pot usage. We are being played for our local official’s cowardice in standing up for our medical marijuana rights.

Eric is right about “schemes” and “control”……darned HOJ discussing political schemes and control on the blogs for years, and now others beginning to follow suit in major media, local media, etc…. A problem though is that whether a “schemed structure” exists, no one knows what the effects will be until after “any scheme is implemented”, kinda like Obamcare.

better late in understanding than never,

Marijuana = hands-off policy

Why?

Enforcement can already occur for environmental impacts with the current laws on the books – politicans, especially local m’fer’s want people to think that nothing can be done, but that is just “social treason and abdication of duty and honor” by so-called community types who really want part of the marijuana money and cash flows by creating a “fee process”. Talk about insincerity, dishonor, etc….

Hands off until feds make changes to the drug laws.

No State help in the matter either,

Let feds play their game all alone and let the state turn a willful blind eye, less the environmental/habitat destructions (which can already be dealt with, but is not in order to create more fear, confusion, etc… so as to be able to write new laws that defy other laws, makes total fucking sense for current day elected officials locally and abroad – ulterior motives)

And note the Federal convictions of locals trafficking in Montana. They were selling to Indian Reservations! Ya think any of it went to Indian children? Like reservations don’t already have enough problems dealing with drug use. HumCo continues its beloved tradition of economically subjugating Native Americans. But these are out of state and therefore out of mind….Growers: avert your eyes, look they other way, and pat yourself on the back as being a ‘good person’.

Local pot growers are complaining they don’t get a large enough share of the black market price being paid by out of state users. For years, local growers have been largely exempt from the risk of local law enforcement. Now, they demand to be indemnified from the Federal legal risks that their out of state buyers have. Talk about greedy! If you want to get illicit prices, fairness dictates you to be subject to risks of illicit behavior.

The Feds have an obligation to protect the States that haven’t(or won’t) legalized pot from the States that have. And also to protect the integrity of States’ pot regulatory schemes from being compromised by jurisdictions that tolerate illegal pot for their economic benefit. In all likelihood, any Federal legalization will allow States to set their own rules, as for alcohol, tobacco, gambling, prostitution. But interstate trafficking will remain sanctioned.

But they aren’t the targets we’re discussing NAN. This woman is specifically going after the people that are actually trying to generate responsible business models basically to make the point that nobody is safe – black market or open.

Is it safe because alcohol and pharmaceuticals are legal? Ok then, should these products be outlawed in today’s society? Didn’t think so.

So, until the Feds change the laws, the states (within their own jurisdiction) should do what they want, but do it alone because the Feds won’t change until the federal laws change. This is why states should turn a willful blind eye if they are against the fed laws (safest options); or not (very disruptive for all).

Hands-off does not mean don’t enforce environmental laws/standards, nothing in the laws that prevent enforcement, but something with the decision makers though!

Point is Eric, just how do you know that the Mendocino growers in the sheriff’s program were not diverting(or planing to divert) their pot? Its almost certain they had been black market growers, simply because there isn’t a sufficiently large local market to support the size of their grows. The zip tie program accounted only for numbers of plants, primarily for the purpose of collecting fees. The amount of the harvest wouldn’t be closely monitored. Diverting a portion would be child’s play under that program. It looked to me(and apparently to the US attorney too) that the County was simply taking a cut of the profits with cursory oversight and calling it all good. I don’t fault Mendocino. Their program was intended to be politically palatable to Libertarian ideals of maximum self regulation and minimum Government involvement. So it had more holes in it than Swiss cheese. What’s needed at this stage is on-site professional inspectors and 24 hr security. almost like a customs warehouse. And the first question would be who pays for that. I don’t have the answer.

Remember, this ‘industry’ isn’t starting from scratch with capital and new technology. Its starting from deep involvement in a black market comprising a distribution network that is extremely profitable. As the LoCo Outpost shows, the white market for pot is already more competitive and local growers are upset because they have much less market power selling a nonperishable agricultural commodity.

The best key for the solution of questions of power between our governments is the fact that every foreign and federal power is given to the federal government and to the states every power purely domestic. The federal is, in truth, our foreign government. Jefferson

NAN – It’s possible, but the deputy Attorney General didn’t allege that. Her position was simply that any compliance with Prop 215 by any state government entity is in violation of Federal Law, end of story. Her cryptic press statement implies that the program was not in compliance with state law, but she hasn’t alleged that in the pleadings from what I understand, nor in any communication with Mendo County.

The DOJ memo states, nothing has changed in their enforcement priorities. I read her ‘cryptic’ statement to mean she identified the likelihood of diversion by individuals who were in contaqct with black market distribution chains. As you’ve seen in the national news, drug enforcers have access to much more domestic communication patterns than was previously known.

There are many pot clinics open for business in HumCo, and even more in L.A. and S.F. The local ones the Feds did go after, like the I-center, were patently fronts for trafficking and they flouted it.

The true and sincere pot proponents are engaging in civil disobedience, education, and promoting pot use as a diversion not a lifestyle. They aren’t setting up enterprises and schemes for the purpose of financial gain. Those who do are simply opportunistic criminals with a patina of Libertarian ideas to conceal their essential greed and antsocial attitudes..

Eric, Fed enforcement of situations that local sheriffs wink at isn’t limited to the Northern District.

Here’s a typical(by HumCo grower standards) small mom and pop family one stop operation. Its so small, they had the kids doing the trimming. In three years, pulled down over $1M in recommendations alone.

Well, according to the folks at HSU who compile the Humboldt Economic Index, strict pot enforcement is a good thing. Who wudda thunk that there are HumCo interests who favor absolute crackdown on pot growers in other places?. I guess the local meaning of ‘free the herb’ is free for ME, forfeiture and prison time for YOU.

“Another dark cloud appeared on the horizon for the
local housing market. The Obama administration
announced that it would not interfere with state laws
pertaining to marijuana. While no one has a crystal ball
to predict the future, it is very possible that this policy
change accelerates the increase in marijuana production
in urban areas in other parts of the state. This could lead
to a reduction in Humboldt County workforce or even
population. If there is less marijuana production taking
place locally, then fewer people are looking to rent (or
willing to pay high prices for indoor grow sites). There will
also be less first time homebuyer demand, since fewer
young households would move to, or stay in, the county.
The effect of a reduction in workforce or population
would be to put long run downward pressure on house
prices.”